Abstract
Difficult issues in design criteria confront the designers of human—computer interaction (HCI) implementations for future power plant control rooms. Such HCI-intensive control—room elements include “soft” controls and displays, computerized procedures, alarm presentations, and support for cooperative information—sharing among crewmembers. This shift in technology, from dedicated controls and displays in fixed locations to multifunction computer—driven operator workstations and wall displays, must focus not only on the required functionality of these interfaces, but also on their crafting and integration in such a way as to minimize the likelihood of operator error.
With the objective of providing early insight into the cognitively error—prone consequences of selected interface dynamics, we are adapting a computer—based cognitive modeling tool, the Man—machine Integrated Design and Analysis System (MIDAS), to quantitatively model certain user requirements for operating different types of interfaces while dealing with high—consequence events in a control room setting. MIDAS was conceived and is being developed as a joint Army/NASA program at the NASA Ames Research Center to test different design approaches to computerizing the cockpits of advanced commercial and military aircraft.
This report presents preliminary results from a project to adapt the MIDAS tool to the nuclear control room domain. These results have enabled comparative observation of cognitive loading depending on whether a supervisor uses computerized procedures or paper procedures to direct crew response to a plant trip event. The results suggest that each technology for procedural support, in its current respective implementation, has its own strengths and weaknesses at different points in the control task dialog.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.